Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 13:48:15 -0500 From: Jason Hellenthal <jhell@DataIX.net> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sysctl description spillover and also setting the sysctl ? Message-ID: <20111130184815.GA70174@DataIX.net> In-Reply-To: <201111301152.47002.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20111125073630.GC7915@DataIX.net> <201111301152.47002.jhb@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:52:46AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote: > On Friday, November 25, 2011 2:36:30 am Jason Hellenthal wrote: > > > > Found a troubling result of the following and figured someone might want to > take a look. > > > > Pay close attention to the output and behavior. > > > > sysctl net.inet.udp.blackhole=0 > > sysctl net.inet.udp.blackhole > > sysctl -d net.inet.udp.blackhole=1 > > sysctl net.inet.udp.blackhole > > > > > > Is this expected ? should it not just display the description instead of > adjusting ? as well not display the description like it is adjusting the > description too ? > > Hah, cute. It should probably fail with an error if you do something like > that, yes. > Yeah thats what I thought about it to but the more I thought about it, if it just displayed the values changing instead of the description when =N is supplied I think that would be acceptable to. 0 -> 1 in this case. Or possibly sys.oid: 0 -> 1 # <Description> since sysctl.conf(5) also takes comments like that. Not really thats something at the top of the list for fixes though. Low fruit. Food for thought.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20111130184815.GA70174>